Associated Press "reporter" Holly Ramer offers "Voter Confronts McCain on Immigration" (link), a slab of pro-massive immigration propaganda that helps show how corrupt the mainstream media is and how much of a propagandist and incompetent reporter she is. John McCain's comments also somewhat contradict his past statements:

[...McCain supports "reform" after the borders are secured...] That wasn't enough for a man who spoke up at the Hopkinton Town Hall, telling McCain that legal immigration could result in civil war in the next five years... "Do the people in Washington - the politicians and the lobbyists and the rich people writing the checks - do they understand the amount of anger the average European Christian, native-born American feels when they see their country turning into a multicultural chaos Tower of Babel?"

Certainly, a question like that will raise some eyebrows among those in Washington and other elites. But, if we're going to constantly discuss the Hispanic vote and politicians are going to feel free to pander to that supposed vote, then perhaps discussing "European Christians" shouldn't be out of bounds, even if pollsters would call them by a different name. And, a discussion of multiculturalism shouldn't be out of bounds either.

However, the intent is clear: the questioner is meant as an example of nativist sentiment. And, of course, rather than acknowledging the non-racist, non-nativist concerns of millions of Americans, McCain responded with politically-correct nothingness:

"I believe the greatest strength of America is the lady who holds her lamp behind the golden door that says send me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses... And I am grateful to live in a nation that has been enriched by people coming to our nation from around the world... I will do everything in my power to secure the borders, but I love this nation and I love the people who have come from around the world."

Obviously, he didn't answer the underlying concerns about the impacts of massive immigration and multiculturalism. Surely, it's possible to "love the people" while at the same time oppose separatist sentiments and the like. All this raises a few questions:

1. Why didn't "reporter" Holly Ramer mention that McCain himself said that unless "reform" was enacted we could have Paris-style riots? That's not the same thing as a "civil war", but it's in the same ballpark.

2. Why didn't Ramer attempt to contextualize and amplify the question, as the AP would most likely do in the case of someone supporting massive immigration?

3. Why did the AP choose that question in the first place? Even the New York Times taped McCain being asked a better question, and surely McCain and others have been asked better questions. Why suddenly rush into print one question, unless of course the goal was to show "nativist" sentiment?

4. And, going directly to Ramer's competence as a reporter, shouldn't she have asked McCain whether he truly thought that reading a poem that was later tacked on to the Statue of Liberty is a proper answer to the question? Shouldn't she have offered a more palatable version of the question and pressed McCain, mentioning that there are indeed millions of Americans who are worried about the impact of massive immigration?

5. In line with #4, exactly how many tough questions on immigration has she ever asked McCain? Can we trust someone who - believe it or not - referred to McCain's blather as "trademark straight talk"? ("McCain faces immigration worries, vows to secure borders", August 11, 2007, link).

The solution to all of these issues is to go to campaign appearance, but ask better questions and then upload the responses to Youtube. That way we can completely disintermediate hack "reporters" like Holly Ramer.